Just wanted to say thanks to everyone for all the input, discussion and dessert over this past months for Watchmen month. I have really enjoyed getting other peoples thoughts and feedback on Watchmen and comics in general as a medium. I hope you all have to.

A big thanks for trying something thats a little bit different and I hope all enjoyed it!

I'll leave a general Watchmen discussion Q up so that if anyone wants to add any thoughts about Watchmen as the year progesses you can.

Thanks again and looking forward to starting again next month with the Secret Life of Bee's and keep on reading those graphic novels!

BOF is a website dedicated to advocating quality in the Batman franchise (and has been operating for 10 years since the 'Batman and Robin' debacle) and also acts as a fan forum.

They also review DC related things in general inlucding movies, DVDs and comics. The panel doing the discussion includes the websites founder, Bill Ramey and a number of other people associated with literature and the comic book industry.

Tuesday, March 24, 2009

While the Crimebusters (or Watchmen in the movie) are the focus of Watchmen, there is a very strong supporting cast of characters that help to drive the narrative; the Minutemen, the psychologist and his wife, the newstand vendor, the kid reading Tales of the Black Freighter, the police detectives and the lesbian couple just to name a few.

How did you feel these characters added to the story? Were they vital or superfluous? How does their portrayal compare between the GN and the movie?

What did everyone think of the importance of the characters back story in the GN or movie? Obviously they both developed the back stories in their own way, and just wondering how important you think the back stories are to understanding the characters?

Can anyone tell me: does the author instruct the illustrator how he wants each panel to appear in a graphic novel? It seems to me alot of the story is told through the pictures and all the credit is given to the author, not the illustrator.

I 'liked' and felt more sympathy for the characters in the movie, which leads me to ask - was it just that I identify better with people on the big screen, that they seem more real? Or did the screen play, for all it's adherance to the GN, soften the characters somehow to make them less loathsome or pathetic?

We've all watched action flicks where the good guys run, jump, pummel and slaughter their way through untold enemies and scoffed at the unbelievability of it all but in the GN and the movie we saw it all again - yet, and especially in the GN, they always tried to draw a line between being masked and superIs it that they have superior training (did they have any training other than Laurie?), is it that the suit and mask created a sense of confidence, ability and strength that allowed them inhuman power? Is it that I am reading too much into something again and I should go with the flow?

The ending:Would the original GN ending have worked? I really felt the lack of that fantastical ending. It was almost a cop out that left the ending sequence a bit empty for me, a bit 'meh'. There was no WTF moment in the movie, no OMG THAT'S what all that meant. The ball of energy was a bit 'blah' and too easy, too mainstream, too 'quick think up an ending they'll swallow'.So saying, when I described the GN ending to G he thought that that would have ruined the movie, so maybe it's just me. Also, I realise that they would have had to add an hour of film to set up the GN ending for the audience. What do you think?

I was thinking about the relevance of the poem Ozymandius. Part of the poem appears on a massive sculpture in the film. The poem is all about how time will obliterate the works of even the most powerful and ambitious of men. Or the pointlessness of everything in the face of time and decay. (how uplifting).

I haven't decided what the significance is in the story, can anyone else shed light on this? Maybe it will become clearer as I read the rest of the book.

For those who have not seen it, here is the poem:

Ozymandiusby: Percy Bysshe Shelley

I met a traveler from an antique landWho said: "Two vast and trunkless legs of stone Stand in the desert...Near them, on the sand, Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose frown,And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,Tell that its sculptor well those passions readWhich yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed;And on the pedestal these words appear:My name is Ozymandius, King of Kings,Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!Nothing beside remains.Round the decay Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bareThe lone and level sands stretch far away.

Well all, really enjoyed the movie. Thought it was fantastic (as did G). Would love to do the ultimate nerd thing (in the privacy of my own home ) and have the GN open to follow along with the film - of course if you repeat this I will deny it.

The way they perfectly recreated the scenes from the GN onto the screen was poetry (G thinks it was lazy)

The big question(s) for me after reading/viewing are:

1. Was it lazy or genius to recreate the shots from the GN onto the screen so perfectly?

2. The ending:

Would the original GN ending have worked? I really felt the lack of that fantastical ending. It was almost a cop out that left the ending sequence a bit empty for me, a bit 'meh'. There was no WTF moment in the movie, no OMG THAT'S what all that meant. The ball of energy was a bit 'blah' and too easy, too mainstream, too 'quick think up an ending they'll swallow'.

So saying, when I described the GN ending to G he thought that that would have ruined the movie, so maybe it's just me. Also, I realise that they would have had to add an hour of film to set up the GN ending for the audience

What do you think?

3. Where does the line between a superhero and a masked hero lie?

We've all watched action flicks where the good guys run, jump, pummel and slaughter their way through untold enemies and scoffed at the unbelievability of it all but in the GN and the movie we saw it all again - yet, and especially in the GN, they always tried to draw a line between being masked and super

Is it that they have superior training (did they have any training other than Laurie?), is it that the suit and mask created a sense of confidence, ability and strength that allowed them inhuman power? Is it that I am reading too much into something again and I should go with the flow?

4. Were the movie characters more likable than the GN characters?

I 'liked' and felt more sympathy for the characters in the movie, which leads me to ask - was it just that I identify better with people on the big screen, that they seem more real? Or did the screen play, for all it's adherance to the GN, soften the characters somehow to make them less loathsome or pathetic?

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

If it's your month, you call the shots on how you run it; topic/book/film, questions, directing conversation etc

Catch-ups are at the discretion of the person who's month it is, they choose if they want one at all, the date, location etc Understanding that some people will be unable to make it.

After you've run your month it would be interesting to see a wrap-up reviewing the topic/book/film and whether your ideas have changed. This could be the basis for an Off The Shelf review, as well, if you would like to do so.

For everyone who went tonight and asked about the article I read where Alan Moore condemned the movie, it was in a copy of FilmInk, but I found this one online, and it quotes similar sentiments. The writer's response to it is very interesting, what does everyone think?

Sunday, March 8, 2009

I enjoyed reading info on 'The Watchmen', one of the reasons I like graphic novels, and the off-shoot movies, like 'Sin City', is the style of the imagery and film noir use of light and shade, which create great atmosphere, reminescent of the B&W Hitchcock movies.

Wednesday, March 4, 2009

Please find below some biographical info on the writer and artist of Watchmen.

Alan Moore (The writer)

Alan Moore was born in Northampton England November 18th 1953. Oldest son of a brewery worker and a printer, Moore's childhood and youth were influenced by poverty. Expelled from a conservative secondary school (and not accepted into any other school) Moore and so remained unemployed with no job qualifications. During this time he worked on a magazine he was publishing with his friends called Embryo and was married in 1974, having two daughters shortly after.

Over his writing career, Moore has contributed to many iconic science fiction titles including the Doctor Who Weekly and 2000AD as well as many other smaller publications before going on to create his own pieces of literary history.

The Miraclemen and V for Vendetta were two of his first ground breaking works which would earn him recognition - a British Eagle Award (1982) and Best Comic Writer (1983).

With his own reputation developing, Moore was offered his own title in the US called Saga of the Swamp Thing. This enabled Moore to address topical issues facing the world (gun control, racism and nuclear waste) and show the depth of his work.

Moore also during this time penned works for DC and Marvel Comics and wrote for some of their major characters including Batman, Superman, X-Men, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and Spawn. For a full biographical list click here http://www.alanmoorefansite.com/bibliography.html.

In 1986, Moore released one the most influential comic stories of the modern era - Watchmen, originally published as a 12 issue run for DC in 1986-87

It was hailed as altering the tone of the comic book genre and changed how it was viewed as a literary medium. It won a comic award at the time (the 1987 Jack Kirby Comics Industry Awards for Best Writer/Artist combination) and has continued to gather praise since.

Since completing these iconic works, Moore has worked for several comic companies including Image Comics, and his own publishing house, America's Best Comics (ABC).

Dave Gibbons has been a major force in comics for more than 30 years. As an artist his credits include Batman, Superman, Dr Who, Green Lantern, Rogue Trooper and of course, his best known work Watchmen.

He has won many awards for his work over the years including 4 Jack Kirby Awards and 2 further nominations.

Tuesday, March 3, 2009

Since Ben has posted his cracking introduction to the Watchmen, we are officially underway! After a couple of conversations with fellow bookclubbers I am using this post as a test to see who is reading the blog. How would you all feel about a quick catchup next Tuesday evening, maybe drinks at Iguana Joes, to have a general chat about our bookclub and how we want to proceed regarding catchups etc? Email me a yay, nay or comment, don't bother posting to the blog.

Looking forward to hopefully seeing you all Tuesday and especially looking forward to talking about Watchmen!

PS. An update to the reading list - July - Exploring Science Fiction with Larissa.

Monday, March 2, 2009

This enigmatic graffiti tag line that appears scrawled on brick walls throughout the story sums up Watchmen.

One of the most iconic comic runs (then collected into a graphic novel) of our time, Watchmen is set in a 1980's dystopian USA during a period of heightened cold war tension. The US and Russia stand on the brink of nuclear war. Nixon is still president after the US constitution was amended to allow him to remain in power (currently into his 4th term). The US won the Vietnam War.

A mixture of fear and fatalism engulfs society as the world steadily marches towards Armageddon.

While the backdrop to the story is epic, the focus is a group of costumed (not super) heroes known as the Crimebusters - ordinary men and women who took it upon themselves to fight crime and bring hope to society. Now outlawed by the government, these heroes have gone into retirement to live out their days as ordinary citizens.

But history it seems, isn't done with them.

One of the Crimebusters is brutally murdered.

Investigation reveals other retired heroes have died in mysterious circumstances. The question becomes: is there a conspiracy to kill costumed heroes or are their past actions catching up with them?

A wonderfully deep story, Watchmen blends an intriguing detective story with social commentary. Several literary forms interweave to bring this amazing work to life - art, character narrative, newspaper articles, book excerpts, interviews and yes, even a comic within a comic.

And the ending…

Note to the uninitiated:

Comics are not every ones cup of tea, which is certainly fair enough. I can't say I'm a huge fan of the classics…that Mr Darcy thinks he's so good [shaking fist]…

Comics though, unlike classics, are a medium that polarise the literary world. Most often viewed as "low brow" pleasures with little depth (which, to be fair, does describe some) they are a form of literature that still struggles to be accepted in the mainstream literary world as a way to tell substantive stories.

Watchmen is one of the comics that proves that's not the case.

A source of discussion during this month inevitably will be the comic book (graphic novel) genre itself...how do you view it? Why do you see it that way? Would you consider a comic literature? Has Watchmen changed your view about comics or reinforced it?